Jun 29, 2023

Public workspaceChronic Recoverable Neuropixels in Mice V.2

  • 1Stanford University
Icon indicating open access to content
QR code linking to this content
Collection CitationEmily A Aery Jones 2023. Chronic Recoverable Neuropixels in Mice. protocols.io https://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.e6nvwjo87lmk/v2Version created by Emily A Aery Jones
License: This is an open access collection distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License,  which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Protocol status: Working
We use this collection and it's working
Created: June 29, 2023
Last Modified: June 29, 2023
Collection Integer ID: 84260
Keywords: electrophysiology, Neuropixels, silicon probe, hippocampus, entorhinal cortex, spatial navigation, freely moving recording, electrode,
Funders Acknowledgement:
Simons Collaboration on the Global Brain
Grant ID: 542987SPI
Stanford School of Medicine Dean's Postdoctoral Fellowship
A.P. Giannini Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship
Abstract
This protocol collection explains how to build a low-cost, lightweight system to implant 1 Neuropixels 1.0 probe or 2 Neuropixels 2.0 probes into mice, record during freely moving behavior, then recover the probes for future use.

Other chronic recoverable designs:

Advantages of this design:
  • Lightweight (entire assembly, including headbar, dental cement, and tape, weighs <3g for single 1.0 probe or <4g for dual 2.0 probes)
  • Allows headfixed or freely moving recordings
  • Quickly attaches to a headstage holder, which provides LEDs for tracking and a counterweight to encourage running
  • Position and angle of internal mount on the probe adjustable before gluing, allowing implantation into any brain region, but custom adjustment is not required, allowing the same probe to be re-inserted into a variety of sites
  • Unlike completely enclosed designs, the shank is uncovered during insertion for better visualization, yet doesn't require delicately surrounding the shank with a glue column
  • Dual 2.0 probes: probes are independently insertable, so can set custom positions, depths, and angles for each

Disadvantages of this design:
  • Not suitable for larger animals (lightweight design likely can't withstand larger forces, flex cable remains exposed, moisture known to wick up shank into PCB in rats)
  • External components are assembled around the probe during surgery rather than during assembly, so surgeries take slightly longer
  • Less elegant than completely enclosed designs and requires a larger skull surface area for gluing
  • Dual 2.0 probes: how close together the probes can get is limited by some of the components

Assembly preview:
Single 1.0 probe
Video

Dual 2.0 beta probes

Video

Files
Protocol
Icon representing the file Assembly: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Name
Assembly: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Version 7
, Stanford University
Emily A Aery JonesStanford University
Protocol
Icon representing the file Implant Surgery: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Name
Implant Surgery: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Version 5
, Stanford University
Emily A Aery JonesStanford University
Protocol
Icon representing the file Explant Surgery: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Name
Explant Surgery: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Version 4
, Stanford University
Emily A Aery JonesStanford University
Protocol
Icon representing the file Building a SpikeGLX Rig with camera: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Name
Building a SpikeGLX Rig with camera: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Version 2
, Stanford University
Emily A Aery JonesStanford University
Protocol
Icon representing the file Freely moving recording: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Name
Freely moving recording: Chronic recoverable Neuropixels in mice
Version 5
, Stanford University
Emily A Aery JonesStanford University